RSS
 

Archive for the ‘Change’ Category

Is learning a key leadership trait?

25 Apr

The short answer is a forceful YES!

Learning is a never-ending process, and how can you improve or create a breakthrough if you don’t think learning is important. However, unlike an expert, a true leader does not just think about their own learning, they think of the learning that occurs for themselves as well as for those that they are leading.

Everyone has three domains of knowledge and skills. First domain is what I call ‘Knowledge’. This is what the leader knows, excels at, and probably the reason why they were able to rise through the ranks. But as Peter Drucker said, the skills that got you the promotion are often not the skills that you need to be successful in your new position.

That is when awareness of the second domain of knowledge and skills becomes important. The second domain is the leader’s ability to access their ‘Ignorance’. This is what you know you don’t know. An attribute of a great leader knows its own strengths and weaknesses, and their ability to rely on others as they bring those skills to the table you do not have. Similarly, the executive that just received his or her promotion, now knows that they have to invest time and learn a set of new skills to be successful in their new position.

However, deep learning and the ability to lead a high performing team come from the third and under-appreciated domain that I call ‘Blindness’. This is what you don’t know you don’ know. A leader’s ability to access this blindness is only made possible by their ability to engage and interact with their team and other around them in a mood of wonder. An important element of true learning, is your ability to inquire, your ability to live in the question. In my opinion, you only are able to access this through conversations with yourself and others. Deep learning occurs in a conversation where you can look at the argument from the other’s perspective and see how they come to their conclusions, and vice versa.

When you are in a conversation where each of you has your own conclusion, you have an opportunity to create deep learning. Your ability in that conversation to distinguish between the facts and interpretations they have observed, as well as their ability to distinguish between the facts and interpretations you have observed is critical to ongoing learning. Often times, when this happens it will open up new possibilities for you as well as for the other. Rarely will the solution be just yours or theirs. When that is the case, you have now uncovered some of the blindness, and deep learning has occurred.

The true test for learning is listening. Listening skills are often overlooked in organizations and it can easily be its own topic. For this conversation, it is where you fully focus on hearing and understanding what the other said without linking it to how it might fit with your conclusions. I know, it is easier said then done, but once you are aware of this not all that difficult. You know when you listened when you are in a conversation and you hear yourself thinking: “I had never thought of looking at it in that way”, or a derivative thereof.

Share
 

Need to understand the business metrics of the people business!

11 Apr

I recently came across the following question from a global HR executive who has seen that more and more lager global company are placing operations leaders into CKBhief HR roles, and place engineers into lower HR roles for developmental assignments. If this is true, he was wondering if this sends a message to the HR professionals?

Although I have not seen this development myself yet, I am not surprised, and I would applaud the practice. There is strong evidence that when leadership focuses on sincerely and purposely developing their people outperform their peers who do not, not as much or not as consistent. At the end of the day, it is all about people doing business with people!

In my experience, HR has often allowed itself being pushed into a role where they are the caretakers of the compliance side of the business and the gatherers of the performance reviews. Often, their metrics are based on how many people attended a certain training session, not what the business impact is of these training sessions, or more importantly how their work impacts the top or bottom line. Frankly, there are plenty of HR professionals who at this current time are not comfortable with leading such a discussion.

In this global and increasingly complex environment, it will be more and more difficult treat your employees on an accounting base where you acquire, use, depreciate and scrap them. There certainly is already plenty of evidence that separates high performing organizations when the executives have the ability to lead and engage their employees as a strategic asset where you nurture, develop, grow and improve their asset value.

Recognizing this trend, is also recognizing the growing importance of HR and Organizational Development in organization to become functions that are equally driven by business drivers, just like operations, manufacturing, marketing, sales, logistics, etc.

How to better create strong HR leaders by intentionally exposing them to different disciplines as well as developing new HR processes and systems by infusing people with non-HR backgrounds! It is by creating such cross-functional ability, that these companies will thrive in this new environment! I trust that this is the beginning of a new and positive trend that will benefit the successful companies and its shareholders.

Share
 

Innovation and Execution Excellence – Practices of High-Performance Organizations/Teams

05 Sep

Innovation and execution excellence is a big subject. As an operating executive for over 30 years, I have studied and applied best practices to improve my own organizational performance and the performance of other organizations.  I think it is misleading to talk about organizations in terms of this organization executes or innovates better than that organization, because it obscures a fundamental fact.  Organizations do not innovate or execute, people innovate and execute.  So, when you say this organization innovates and executes well, what does this really mean.  It means the people in that organization have installed effective processes and have developed the capability to work effectively together.  What emerges is innovation and execution excellence. 

Ultimately, all results are achieved by people following a process or processes. This is a very simple, but powerful concept. When you think about it, it cannot be any other way.  Everything we do in life is done by a process driven by a capability. This can be represented by the Process Cycle Model below. I was first introduced to this model in 1991, in a somewhat different form, by Brian Yost of Yost and Associates.

 

Before I explore the Process Cycle Model and its relationship to innovation and execution excellence, I want to articulate a number of axioms that provide additional context for this discussion.  I’ve learned these axioms over the years.  I call them axioms because, like in geometry, an axiom is a truth that does not have to be proved, but is used to prove other truths.

Here are the axioms which I am using to support this discussion on the practices used by high-performance organizations/teams to produce innovation and execution excellence. 

  1. An organization is a system, of people and processes, perfectly designed to produce the results it is producing. The term organization can be applied at the enterprise, department and individual team level.
  2. If you want to change the results, you have to change the design.
  3. Results are produced by the individual and collective capabilities of the people driving a process or processes.
  4. Language is generative not just descriptive. Our conversations produce results through the language-action relationship.
  5. Everything that happens between people happens in the spoken and unspoken conversations people have or do not have with one another. In this context, we take a broad view of conversations.  To us, conversations are anything that provokes interpretation.  This includes anything we pick up with our senses as an active or passive participant in the conversation. This means conversations are never innocent.
  6. Since everything that happens between people in an organization happens in conversations, the system design is held in place by the spoken and unspoken conversations.  However, it is the unspoken conversations that have the most gravitational pull creating the status quo.
  7. To change the results you have to change the conversations.  This means having the courage to start new conversations, stop some conversations and change other conversations.

 

We have used the Process Cycle above for years as a lens and actionable framework to lead organizations to produce the results they actually want to produce, rather than continuing to produce the results they do not want.  High-Performance organizations/teams are able to see the relationship between their capabilities, processes and the results they are producing. Without this lens, it is difficult to make design changes.  You cannot intervene in a world you cannot see.

<More>

Share
 

Do you have or see meetings after the real meeting?

13 Jul

We live in language similar to how fish live in water. It is transparent to us. If we want to improve our conversations in a fashion as we discuss here on the Executive Perspective blog, you also need to understand the type of conversations that you are currently having within your team and organization.

  • Have you ever been part of an organization laced with politics?
  • Do you recognize the person who is not there to help the team agenda but is trying to push their own agenda?
  • Do you ever feel that you are not receiving the information you need to be successful at your position?
  • Do you participate in meetings where you or someone else is not saying everything, but are calling a smaller meeting after the meeting?



One common denominator in all these organizations is what we call ‘Inauthentic Conversations.’ In this conversation, you as the speaker are communicating certain things, but more importantly you are withholding other information that you should be sharing with the listener. The listener now cannot interact to that what you are not saying, has to make their own interpretation, and typically will withhold information themselves in their response.

These withheld conversations unexamined will not allow you to break through the cycle of politics, dysfunctionality or those meetings after the meeting. These withheld conversation represent an automatic and immediate break in trust. This will always impact employee performance, and hence organizational performance as illustrated in this recent study from Watson Wyatt.

What do you think the impact is of stopping the withheld conversations at your organizations?

Share
 

Are you part of a High Performing Team?

29 Jun

We often hear that high-performing teams happen by accident. “If you hire the right people, you feel it when you are on a high-performing team.” Does that sound familiar?

That is not our reality. We strongly believe that you can create high-performing teams by design but in order to do that there are three things that you need to know:

1. Where are you going?

    Does your team have a strong purpose and a clear mission of what it needs to achieve? The difference between a team and a group is that a team has a shared goal, and the team members are aligned and committed to get to that goal. However, they will not talk about the goal, or any issues they see in getting to that goal, unless there is sufficient amount of relationship and trust.

    2. How are you going to get there?

      How is your team working together, and are there clear accountabilities of who is doing what in order to achieve the goal? If there is no clear conversation about how you work together and being sincere about your accountabilities, team members will have to start guessing about what it is that you will or will not do.

      3. Where are you now?

        None of the first two distinctions will matter at all, unless you as team have a clear idea of where you are currently. Additionally, you are prepared to have an open conversation about what it is you need to do to achieve the mission. We have a simple high performing team survey that we use to get that conversation started. What is interesting about the results of that survey is that there often is a difference between how you think the team will answer and what they will actually answer.

        For a limited time, we offer our readers of our blog access to this high performing team survey that they can fill out with their team. If you are interested to take this survey with your team, contact me at kbogaert@strategic-momentum.com, and I will be happy to set you and your team up for a free survey that will take each team member 10 minutes to fill out anonymously.

        Share
         

        Every organization is perfectly designed to produce the results it is producing!

        17 Jun

        Every organization is a system, and as a system it is perfectly designed to produce the results it is producing! Is this true? We have been in front of executives who will disagree with this, at least initially. Often it is because they trip over the fact that it is perfectly designed. As a leader, this can be a hard message to hear, as the buck stops with you!

        Can you see that this sometimes is a hard message to deliver to executives? If you are not getting the results that you are looking for, and yet you have been working hard, does that mean that you have been doing it wrong?

        Now, let’s look at the good news. The good news is that once you accept this premise, and you see that it is a design, now you can start looking for what it is you can change in your design to significantly improve your results.

        As discussed at several topics here on our blog, you design your company system through the conversations that you are actively having as well as those that you have codified in employee manuals, procedures, plans. However, your design is also stuck in unspoken conversations that you should be having but you are not having. The classic example is of a company that wants to be innovative but does not reward risk taking.

        Once you recognize that, you can now also see that if you want to change your results, and therefore the design of your team or company, you just have to change your conversations.

        Share
         

        Igor Ansoff’s strategy development process!

        01 Jun

        I, Kobe, came to the US in 1995 to work and study with Dr. Igor Ansoff, often referred to as the Father of Strategic Management. Although he was a great contributor to management thinking, I do think that he mainly got that reference because he was the first to dedicate a book solely on the subject of corporate strategy. I am dating his initial contribution as this happened in 1965. This book is described as “the most elaborate model of strategic planning in the literature” by Henry Mintzberg, a consistent critic of Dr. Ansoff.

        One of the most recognized models of Dr. Ansoff  is the Product-Market Growth Matrix, or Ansoff Matrix which he published in 1957. Although it does not sound like much in our MBA driven culture where every problem has its own matrix, at the time this was a revolutionary concept.

        The matrix provided, and it still does to this day, a good basis for a strategic discussion. Its main weakness was rooted in the fact that it was one of the first strategic models in the market place. Its initial success drove the widespread adaptation of this model and it quickly became a ‘one-size-fit-all’ solution for any company that wanted to do strategic planning. That combined with the analytical and prescriptive nature of the tools, checklists and processes in his initial work as described in Corporate Strategy, made it too difficult to consistently implement.

        Although the matrix has its use, and it is never a lost conversation, it clearly is not a solution to every strategic dilemma, even less so in an ever-increasing complex environment. Lucky for me, as I am quite a bit younger, it did not discourage Dr. Ansoff in his strategic thinking. I strongly believe that to this day one of his greatest contributions to business world is the Contingent Strategic Success Paradigm. It is the major recognition in that strategy is not a balance sheet, a point in time where you write a plan that you put on the shelf. The strategy development process sets up strategy development as an ongoing process. Since that time, there are other great thinkers that I admire that have developed similar strategy development processes. The main advantage of looking at strategy as a development process is that there is always room for continuous improvement, and there is the recognition that strategy has to be flexible if the company is to stay successful.

        Dr. Ansoff took that process one step further by firmly linking the environment, with the strategy and the capability, where the premise is: “In order for a company to reach optimum profitability in the future, a company needs to align its strategy and capability with the future turbulence of the environment.” Ansoff’s strategy process has been empirically validated its process in a wide variety of industries and over 1,500 companies.

        Other management gurus have picked up several of his ideas and made them more famous such as Michael Porter’s competitive advantage, Gary Hamel and C.K. Prahalad’s core capability and Tom Peters’ “sticking to your knitting”, to name but just a few.

        I will expand more about Ansoff’s strategy development concepts in future blogs.



        Share
         
         
        Rss Feed Tweeter button Facebook button Linkedin button Youtube button
        © Strategic Momentum 2001-2011 - All rights reserved